zeldafandomcom-20200223-history
Forum:Speedy Block
:This sounds like a good idea to me, as it would put out a hit more broadly than only going to one admin's talk page. I'm confused though, because I don't know of a way to add categories to users.--[[User:Fierce Deku|'Fierce']][[User talk:Fierce Deku|'Deku']] 05:00, January 25, 2011 (UTC) ::It would probably go on the vandal's talk page. -'Isdrak ' 05:21, January 25, 2011 (UTC) }}| }|N00bish Vandal}}) has vandalized }| }|N00bish Vandal Page with Shippings}}. The reason they should be blocked is for }| }|Spam pages and supporting Epink}} |} That should work if I did it right. --'ϐαςς ᴶαϟϟι ' 05:35, January 25, 2011 (UTC) :Good work. I like it. -'Minish Link' 14:09, January 25, 2011 (UTC) Eh, it's an okay idea, but the vandals are usually banned shortly after their vandalism. However, if a vandal does get overlooked and if the template is removed right after the ban (by the person who put it there, not the admin admin might block without seeing the template), then it's an okay idea. However (second "However" to contradict the first), this shouldn't become a thing where the admin has to go around announcing each ban for the possibility that someone put up the ban template. Also, this could easily be abused (Someone could put this template on someone who he or she, not the admin, thinks should be banned, which could potentially be chaotic). If we do implement this idea, we should limit it to just the Rollbackers to put up the template. And yeah, that template needs some work. The 20:53, January 25, 2011 (UTC) }}| }|72.129.245.176}} has vandalized }| }|Four Giants}}. The reason they should be blocked is for }| }|Bias toward a particular Football team}} |} Probably a much better version of the above template, since the above one was made in a rush at midnight before I left for bed. I agree that it should be a template used only by certain people, since, as TM said it, it could be misused, and it would be very bad. --'ϐαςς ᴶαϟϟι ' 01:19, January 26, 2011 (UTC) :I disagree. As long as the admin checks the user's contributions before blocking based upon the template, there should be no reason to restrict its use. -'Isdrak ' 01:49, January 26, 2011 (UTC) Professional Bump After letting this sit and die for a while, I've thought it over, and it's not really needed. If there's a vandal attack, we have the rollbackers/admins to revert it. And if an admin isn't on at the time, most of us have ways to connect at least one, if not more than one, admin to get them on the wiki to block said vandal. We're also able, although most people don't know of this method, to connect VSTF to get them to give a vandal a short block 18:31, 2011 April 14 Charitwo (Talk | contribs) blocked 75.69.177.33 (Talk) with an expiry time of 2 hours (account creation disabled, e-mail blocked, cannot edit own talk page) ‎ (Inserting nonsense/gibberish into pages) 18:38, 2011 March 17 Randomtime (Talk | contribs) blocked 174.137.63.71 (Talk) with an expiry time of 2 hours (account creation disabled, e-mail blocked, cannot edit own talk page) ‎ (vandalism) 18:26, 2011 March 17 Exlex (Talk | contribs) blocked 72.76.142.244 (Talk) with an expiry time of 1 day (account creation disabled, e-mail blocked, cannot edit own talk page) ‎ (vandalism) 12:21, 2011 February 12 VegaDark (Talk | contribs) blocked Vivainfernape (Talk | contribs) with an expiry time of 1 month (account creation disabled, e-mail blocked, cannot edit own talk page) ‎ (vandalism) 06:14, 2011 January 15 Randomtime (Talk | contribs) blocked Josiah99 (Talk | contribs) with an expiry time of 1 day (account creation disabled) ‎ (Vandalism) until an admin comes around to block the user for the desired length. So a speedy block template isn't really needed all that much. --[[User:Jäzzi|'Jäzzi']](Talk) 14:09, May 15, 2011 (UTC) :As I said before, I was still a bit torn...It seems kind of unnecessary given what you just said anyway. A lot of you guys have me and others on Skype and a few admins come on the IRC, and then there's the VTSF people. At this point we really don't need it. -'Minish Link' 14:46, May 15, 2011 (UTC) ::I'm not that worried about it, we usually deal with vandals relatively quickly. I don't think this would get admin attention that much if any faster than a message on an admin's talk page with the edit summary "VANDAL BAN" or something obvious that any admin skimming the recent changes will see. I'd be willing to consider this topic concluded if other people are.--[[User:Fierce Deku|'Fierce']][[User talk:Fierce Deku|'Deku']] 02:53, May 16, 2011 (UTC) I just thought of something else that keeps this template from being useful. The template would have been useful if there was some easy way to check what pages had the template on it, other that using the "what links here tool" (which isn't entirely reliable--remember the Stepladder incident, FD?) or looking through the recent changes (the vandalism itself is just as easy to find this way). However, the fastest way is to just do what we've been doing all along--just message and admin and they'll know to block the vandal a couple seconds after they log in. Jedimasterlink (talk) 07:07, May 16, 2011 (UTC) Since it appears that we're in the zone for against, I'm going to wait till around 9:30-10:00 to cross this off the list if anybody has any objections, speak now. —[[User:Jäzzi|'Jäzzi']](Talk) 01:01, May 17, 2011 (UTC) :Well, I'm fine with not having it if it's not wanted, but I'd like to point out that all of the points raised against this could apply to the Speedy Delete template just as easily. Also, this would have to have a category (like the candidates for speedy deletion one) to be of any use. I thought that that was a given, but I guess I should have made it clear. EDIT: As it turns out, I did talk about it. -'Isdrak ' 01:18, May 17, 2011 (UTC) ::Deletion of pages is only a VSTF task when an admin isn't around and there's the need of a block and the vandal has created spam pages. —[[User:Jäzzi|'Jäzzi']](Talk) 01:22, May 17, 2011 (UTC) Quick Finish Up Okay, this forum is basically dead now. However, I wouldn't mind if there were this template but if it were used for vandals who get away for a full day (24 full hours). For example, if there is an IP who vandalizes a page but then an admin doesn't notice the vandalism. If the IP is not blocked for those 24 hours, someone can put a Speedy Block on that IP's page to point it out to the admin, who then decides if the IP is block-worthy and does justice. The 18:36, July 7, 2011 (UTC) :Seeing as this has sat for a while, I don't think it's needed. As people will leave messages on the talk pages of admins. Or they can contact VSTF. Easy as pie and it's not exactly needed. ::The way I handle vandals in the first place is to revert the vandalism and then go to the last active admin's talk page and link them to the problem. It has the subject "Vandal" so if another admin comes on they'll probably also notice it. I think that's what everyone else does too. Basically, if you tell an admin in the first place, you don't need any sort of template adding/telling them again. If any non-admins are reading this and don't tell an admin straight off when they see a vandal, then they should start doing so, and I think we'll be fine.--[[User:Fierce Deku|'Fierce']][[User talk:Fierce Deku|'Deku']] 22:28, July 7, 2011 (UTC)